Misscliks - New Website Launch!

That said, I like your "about" info regarding your goal of an "equal" gaming community. But I also dislike it. Because it's not equality when you only feature women and leave out the menfolk.

On April 09 2014 20:39 Thereisnosaurus wrote:


The argument, a completely valid argument from my perspective, goes that certain groups (IE. men of certain demographics) are disproportionately represented in the media in question (games & game culture), or that their viewpoints are disproportionately represented.

In an ideal place, various invested groups would have equal and fair representation but, as that is clearly not the case, in order to overcome the imbalance of the over-represented people and perspectives, those who are under-represented need to be given a disproportionate shove to balance things out to where it is reasonably assumed that they should be. The same principle lies behind affirmative action, if you're familiar with the concept. In practical terms this means taking every opportunity to promote and welcome women's (and other under-represented groups) contributions to the medium and culture, sometimes over members of the over-represented groups who may objectively (or at least traditionally) be seen as more deserving of that attention.

It's important to note that this kind of thing is NOT egalitarian in the strict sense, it is merely one pragmatic way of moving towards a place where equality is possible. Feeling it is disproportionate and in some senses discriminatory is quite normal and technically correct, but the point is that if you really do feel like equal and fair representation is a worthy goal, this is one of the imperfect ways we have of moving towards it. For a number of reasons just trying to go from the current state of affairs immediately to one where groups are given fair and equal representation just don't work. The simplest word for it is inertia, I hope that is evocative enough to illustrate something exceptionally complex.

I say this in great detail because often the response you'll get to such a comment is 'are you fucking serious'. These are usually given by people who do not feel you have given the matter due consideration (mildly), but are of course themselves having difficulty accounting for your perspective. I hope I have in some small way helped alleviate those differences in perspective.

On April 09 2014 20:41 ninazerg wrote:
I have a really important question about the name.

Why "misscliks" and not "missclix"? Somehow, I feel like the x would be cooler. Of course, no matter which one you pick, some pervert is going to read it as "missclits". But you can't live in fear of perverts... that's what I've learned from playing video games.

On April 09 2014 16:48 TOCHMY wrote:
Ambitious indeed. Site looks good. A lot of content ( A little too much for my taste in fact. Front page has so much stuff in it that it almost feels a bit daunting).

My big question is, what do you guys bring to the table that isn't already there? Why should I frequent your site instead of TL/Curse/Reddit/Joindota/whathaveyou.

That said, I like your "about" info regarding your goal of an "equal" gaming community. But I also dislike it. Because it's not equality when you only feature women and leave out the menfolk.

On April 09 2014 20:41 ninazerg wrote:
I have a really important question about the name.

Why "misscliks" and not "missclix"? Somehow, I feel like the x would be cooler. Of course, no matter which one you pick, some pervert is going to read it as "missclits". But you can't live in fear of perverts... that's what I've learned from playing video games.

On April 09 2014 20:41 ninazerg wrote:
I have a really important question about the name.

Why "misscliks" and not "missclix"? Somehow, I feel like the x would be cooler. Of course, no matter which one you pick, some pervert is going to read it as "missclits". But you can't live in fear of perverts... that's what I've learned from playing video games.

On April 10 2014 08:27 Pontius Pirate wrote:

I went to a punk show in a basement and there was a two-girl band who played called Ms. Clits. The guitarist-singer punched me in the jaw and then promptly improvised an apology into the lyrics. It was pretty surreal.

Great job on the website, although I agree that there are maybe a few too many boxes of information on the front page, and the layout seems to change themes one too many times. Maybe if stuff could be condensed a bit more, and each box could be expanded at the costs of the page margins...

On April 09 2014 20:39 Thereisnosaurus wrote:


The argument, a completely valid argument from my perspective, goes that certain groups (IE. men of certain demographics) are disproportionately represented in the media in question (games & game culture), or that their viewpoints are disproportionately represented.

In an ideal place, various invested groups would have equal and fair representation but, as that is clearly not the case, in order to overcome the imbalance of the over-represented people and perspectives, those who are under-represented need to be given a disproportionate shove to balance things out to where it is reasonably assumed that they should be. The same principle lies behind affirmative action, if you're familiar with the concept. In practical terms this means taking every opportunity to promote and welcome women's (and other under-represented groups) contributions to the medium and culture, sometimes over members of the over-represented groups who may objectively (or at least traditionally) be seen as more deserving of that attention.

It's important to note that this kind of thing is NOT egalitarian in the strict sense, it is merely one pragmatic way of moving towards a place where equality is possible. Feeling it is disproportionate and in some senses discriminatory is quite normal and technically correct, but the point is that if you really do feel like equal and fair representation is a worthy goal, this is one of the imperfect ways we have of moving towards it. For a number of reasons just trying to go from the current state of affairs immediately to one where groups are given fair and equal representation just don't work. The simplest word for it is inertia, I hope that is evocative enough to illustrate something exceptionally complex.

I say this in great detail because often the response you'll get to such a comment is 'are you fucking serious'. These are usually given by people who do not feel you have given the matter due consideration (mildly), but are of course themselves having difficulty accounting for your perspective. I hope I have in some small way helped alleviate those differences in perspective.